HR Training: How can I get fast faster ? (Page 3)

Wow , that was a lot of input :-)
Thanks everyone , for their feedback . I found it, as always on BT , incredibly useful reading the replies. Took me a while to assimilate the info. but here are some comments:

This is an interesting guidelines ... i've always read the 10% rule but never this , so far. So, in terms of minutes ... lets say I do 4 1-hr runs during the week , then it looks like i shouldn't do more than a 2 hr long run on the w/e . Is this accurate?

If so , then how will I ever train for a marathon under these circumstances or do I have to wait for my pace to improve and hence I can cover more miles in the same amount of time ? I was under the impression that I could do the 10% rule and hence keep increasing the long run distance reasonably and get to marathon training i.e. 18-20 milers .

This is an interesting option to mix up my workouts but I was wondering if I could/should do track-intervals or should I just do the tempo runs and strides to start with ?

Did you run the baseline halfmary of 1:52 using HR based training . If so, can you give me some details on how long you created your base and such ? I'm curious if you improved significantly with just a couple of months of being consistent with the HR training which would speak volumes abt my natural aerobic base

AFAIK , Hal Higdon doesn't have any training plans with the HR training in mind ! I have read and used elements of his plans in the past but pl. let me know if u've found a plan which incorporates HR-based training

If however, the prevailing wisdom (and it seems like it is ) is that , running this manner is the best way to improve , then so be it , I'll probably convince myself to enjoy these type of runs . I'm sure its very personal , but for me , its a lot more fun when I can challenge myself for eg. today , i'll run 4 miles under 40 mins or i'll do 200/400/800 ladder workouit in a certain set time per interval .

Doing 3-4 plodding runs for 30-60 minutes a week will work, but I think I might be misconstruing what you're doing, so bear with me, and it ties in the first point as well.

I don't think you need to just do slow, plodding workouts all the time, with no regard for other stuff.  I would caution against serious interval workouts, but I don't see much need to ALWAYS run in the same HR zone.  Run harder if you feel good.  If not, run slower.  I think that people sometimes develop the mentality where they obsess over the little numbers.  And I think most people would tell you that's not what it's about (OK, I don't know about most, but I know what I would tell you).

As for the 50% rule: I've also seen that, but I know that for many beginner programs, that rule gets violated, especially when it comes to peak mileage time, and incorporating the longer runs.  I think it works better from a mileage basis, too, but that's more of a personal assessment than anything.  And regrading Higdon: I've never seen him do a HR-specific plan, but there is no reason why you can't use his plans.  You just need to read the description of the weekly runs, and where it says "easy pace", that's your Z1-2 running.  Tempo would be harder, probably Z3-4 depending on who you are/the distance/whatever other factors.

Don't worry about staying in a specific zone ALL the time.  It all works out with patience and hard work. 

Reading this debate about how the "more...more" advice is given to a beginner raised an interesting question ... who is a "beginner" ? i.e. what criteria is used to classify one as a beginner .

I don't consider myself a beginner in the typical sense of the word since I have done a few endurance events and while it may not mean much to a lot of you experienced folks ... I have completed a challenging Half-Ironman ... so no I don't think am a beginner . However , on the other hand , I know I have tons to learn but then the learning experience will/should never end

Most beginners , I think get the 10% rule ; I know that was one of the first things I picked up but the challenge I have currently is that while HR-based training has its proponents, there aren't that many plans out there and insufficient guidance for success using its methods . There's a lot of info. on Mike Ricci's site but most of it seems to be geared to the experienced athlete or at least one with an existing aerobic base.

Yep, thats me Or at least , I've read/been told/realized that the best way to get benefit from HR training is to stay within the zones. Isn't it true that going harder would push you into a diff. zone and then you might even go anaerobic ?

Its interesting you say this since what most people seem to to say about HR training , talk about staying in the "appropriate" zone to get your aerobic base . This sounds like an interesting option for at least 1x a week i.e. just run on your own pace .

Don't get me wrong , I like the HR training . I think it has given me a lot more structure and ease of training . I don't feel burnt after my long runs . Its just that I don't have a lot more training time I can put in so i want to ensure that i can optimize what I'm doing and get the max. benefit of my training .

While I know I'm not going to be BQ'ing anytime soon , but I'd like to get to have a consistent 10:00 pace . However, it seems like with HR training, one just has to put in the miles and hope for the best

Not that it really matters, but here is what works for me, and is based loosely on Pfitzinger-Douglas' training philosophies (in workouts per week):

One Long run - 15 - 20 miles

One - General aerobic - 8 - 12 miles

One - Tempo/stride - 8 - 12 miles with tempo being anywhere from 4 - 7 miles at 1/2 mary. pace.  Strides would be about 1 per mile at a bit over 5k pace with fast turnover.  (Workout is replaced with track/speed work as race gets closer - which means starting this week for IMFL for me .... ugh!!).

Two - recovery runs - 3 - 6 miles easy (usually include one as a brick for my long ride).

Typically in the 30 - 45 mile per week range.  And few people have ever accused me of being slow at any distance .....

(I'm also working off of almost 4,000 miles running in the last 3 years - heck of a base - but still trying to improve).

I think there's more to it than just putting in the miles and hoping for the best.  But I know what you mean.

I posted something along these lines in another thread earlier today.  Basically, it doesn't matter if you use HR, RPE, pace, some esoteric method, of figuring out your training.  People make this waaaaay to complex.  Here's the basics of it:

On easy days, run easy.  On hard days, run hard.

Ohhhhmmmmmm.......  No go forth and run, grasshopper.

Seriously, though, that's the basics of it.  There are many ways to determine "easy", and "hard", and there are various ways of incorporating "hard" training into your schedule.  For me, a harder day would be somewhat shorter and at a fast pace, or a longer distance at a more moderate pace.

I know I can get wrapped up in my pacing.  So I try not to focus on it.  Sometimes it works....

A lot of it depends on your goals, and your current standing.  Like you've said, you're not quite a "beginner", you've done a number of events, you've been training for a while.  So, with that bit of advice, I'd say that you need to reevaluate your current training methods.  I would say in your case, there's a place for the easy runs, and they'll be a majority of it.  Winter time is a good time to focus on that stuff for most triathletes.  Come race-specific training, I'd start throwing in more intense workouts.  Throw in some speed stuff, some hills, etc.

And remember, if you can take the time to sit there and figure out what zone is what, you can take ANY training plan, and adopt it to your needs.  Most plans will say "easy" "tempo" "hard" "whatever".  Correlate those to a specific zone, and there ya have it. 

Not quite - the long run is included in your overall run volume so, in your example there is six hours of running which would between 1.8-3 hours.

As for training for a marathon, I wouldn't recommend running more than 2.5-3 hours (depending on the athlete) for a long run. Also, while training for a marathon, your long run will gradually take more of your overall run volume but should still be under 50%. I believe that it is better to build run volume through frequency rather than one massive session that requires more recovery than two shorter sessions.

That's why you need to find a group or some nice trails to run.  60 minutes goes by so fast you won't even notice it if you are engulfed in conversation, or running through a really pretty area where you get lost in the scenery.   Keeping the lower HR makes this all the more enjoyable as you can actually hold a conversation, or be relaxed enough to look around.  Those 'mindless' z2 runs (especially the 90+ min ones) are where I do my best thinking.  Gives me a chance to relax and be lost in thought